Compassionate appointment should be considered irrespective of the lapse of time, especially when the family of the deceased government servant is in need.

1. Heard Mr. A.S. Mujibur Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D. Sasikumar, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

2. Challenging the order dated 6.11.2009 passed by the 4th respondent and for a direction to the respondents to pass an order of appointment for any suitable post on compassionate ground in any of the Government Schools, the petitioner is before this Court.

3 Facts of the case as put forth in the affidavit would run thus:

(i) The petitioner’s father Mr. Abdul Hafeez was working as B.T. Assistant under the Education Department in the Government Higher Secondary School, Sirugambur and he died on 15.10.1993 at the age of 50, while he was in service. At the time of his father ‘ s death, the petitioner was aged 13 years and he was doing 8th standard only. The petitioner completed SSLC in the year 1995. After attaining the age of majority, the petitioner submitted an application to the 4th respondent on 30.12.1999 and requested for an appointment on compassionate ground. Prior to that, his mother submitted an application on 23.6.1999 to the 4th respondent for compassionate appointment. The 4th respondent, by his letter dated 10.9.1999 directed the petitioner ‘ s mother to submit certain details through the Head Master Government Higher Secondary School, Sirugambur. Accordingly, the petitioner ‘ s mother submitted a detailed representation along with necessary particulars to the 4th respondent on 5.1.2000. The Headmaster, Government Higher Secondary School, Sirugambur, by his proceedings dated 9.3.2000 informed the petitioner ‘ s mother that only one application should be submitted for compassionate appointment. Therefore, as per the proforma, the particulars of the petitioner was again submitted on 14.6.2000.

(ii) The petitioner‘s mother also submitted an application on 21.6.2000, requesting compassionate appointment to the petitioner alone. The No Objection Certificate from the petitioner‘s sister was also enclosed with the application submitted by his mother. The 2nd respondent, by his proceedings dated 18.9.2002 directed the 4th respondent to get certain details to be obtained from the Tahsildar by the petitioner‘s mother with respect to the non-employment certificate. The petitioner‘s mother once again submitted a detailed representation in January 2003 enclosing the non-employment certificate, etc. Thereafter, the 4th respondent, by his proceedings dated 1.8.2007 rejected the application for compassionate appointment on the ground that the petitioner‘s mother was eligible for compassionate appointment at the time of death of his father. The Head Master, Government Higher Secondary School, Sirugambur, by his letter dated 26.9.2007 directed the petitioner to get back the papers returned by the 4th respondent.

(iii) Therefore, the petitioner submitted an appeal to the 4th respondent through the Head master, Government Higher Secondary School, Sirugambur, which was forwarded to the 4th respondent on 8.10.2007, by the Head Master, Government Higher Secondary School, Sirugambur. The 4th respondent, by his proceedings dated 12.10.2007, directed the petitioner to submit the certificate from the Tahsildar with respect to the elder son who is living separately without extending any financial support to the petitioner and his mother. On 7.7.2008, the 4th respondent again informed the petitioner that the direction issued to the petitioner, by letter dated July 2008 should be complied with and resubmitted on or before 17.7.2008. Accordingly, the petitioner, by his representation dated 17.7.2008, submitted all the necessary details. By a letter dated 5.8.2008, the 4th respondent directed the petitioner to submit details about O.S. No. 4234 of 1993 on the file of the Sub-Court, Trichy.

(iv) On 11.8.2008, a detailed representation was submitted by the petitioner seeking compassionate appointment. Again, the 2nd respondent, by his proceedings dated 29.8.2008, informed the 4th responden